Embarrass deadbeat dads, then seize their cars
October 18, 2006
|
Posted by ANCPR
Note: Here we go again folks. These people never give up.Â
Newsday.com: Westchester: Embarrass `deadbeat dads,’ then seize their cars
By JIM FITZGERALD
Associated Press Writer
October 17, 2006, 5:59 PM EDT
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. — The next step in Westchester County’s drive to collect child support from deadbeat parents may be seizing their cars and selling them, the Social Services commissioner said Tuesday.
Commissioner Kevin Mahon spoke as the county, hoping to shame some parents into compliance, took out a newspaper ad to publish the photographs of four men who have skipped out on a total $193,000 in child support payments.
Mahon said he would do whatever works, including impounding an offender’s car and then selling it if there’s no support payment in 30 days.
“If you don’t want your picture in the paper, you don’t want your license suspended, you don’t want your car impounded, you don’t want to go to jail, do the right thing,” Mahon said. “Pay your child support.”
County Executive Andrew Spano said the newspaper photos could accomplish three objectives:
_Embarass the four men into making payments.
_Prompt people who recognize them to report their whereabouts.
_Put other offenders on notice that their pictures, too, might appear in the newspaper or on TV.
He noted that reneging on court-ordered child support “not only changes the quality of life of the spouse and children but it also dips into the pockets of the taxpayers” by forcing many families onto welfare rolls.
“If we could get one of these guys it would pay for the ad 10 times over,” Spano said. The quarter-page ad in Tuesday’s New York Post cost $6,624. Spano said it would not be repeated until results are evaluated.
The county executive said he paid support for four children from a previous marriage and had to adjust his spending to do it.
“I could not afford to live the lifestyle I (previously) lived because I had to pay child support, so I didn’t live that lifestyle,” he said. “I changed it. I downgraded it. I made sure I had the money, because it’s an important thing for families to make sure that their children are taken care of.”
Mahon said parents who are tracked down often say they don’t have enough money but have new cars and take vacations.
“They’re not willing to say, `What’s my first responsibility?”‘ he said.
If someone who owes child support has no job, he said, the county would help that person find one.
Spano said about $144 million is owed in the county, and the office of Child Support Enforcement is hoping to collect $60 million this year, up from $58 million last year.
Carmen Almeida, ex-wife of one of the men pictured in the ad, is owed $63,000. She said Tuesday that her husband has never paid any support in the seven years they’ve been divorced. As a result, she said, their 18-year-old daughter may have to drop out of American University in Washington next semester when a scholarship runs out.
She fears her ex-husband, Alberto Almeida, may have fled to Portugal, but hopes friends of his who see the picture “will speak to him and see if he can send his daughter something. She needs the money and he always said he loved her very much.”
Manuel Barreiro, director of the child support office, said he had no record of an attorney representing Alberto Almeida, and Carmen Almeida did not recall the name of her ex-husband’s divorce lawyer.
___
On the Net:
Link to Westchester County’s `Wanted for Failure to Pay Child Support’ page: http://www.westchestergov.com
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
Categories: News
|
Leave a reply
Is this not more of the same? Perhaps a slight change that trite details were mentioned at the end of the article.
But again here we have only one dead horse being kicked around.
So sad that its incite to riot time and the prey has once again been made to be a group of the citizenry.
How about a story from the press on the destruction of fathers and children due to the scarlet letter applications.
THank you ANCPR for alerting to this story.
That guy let a couple critical pieces of their fraud slip in this one! Look at this one quote:
He noted that reneging on court-ordered child support “not only changes the quality of life of the spouse and children but it also dips into the pockets of the taxpayersâ€
1) “renege”!? I’ve been saying for some time, IT’S ALL COMMERCE! This so-called “order” for child-support IS A CONTRACT! Just don’t sign the damn thing! Rescind your signature for threat duress and coersion if you already signed. Look at the definition of this word:
TheFreeDictionary defines renege as follows:
renege
To fail to carry out a promise or commitment
Did you PROMISE to pay this amount, or did they trick you into thinking they were commanding/ordering you to do it? My friends, they tricked you, and threatened you.
2) “changes the quality of life for the spouse”. Hello? “spouse”?? Not married anymore, duh! She left, she bailed, she shattered the family (80+ % of the time these days). Now she is whining about HER quality of life? How many men are living on the streets, homeless, and destitute because of this? And does anybody consider HIS quality of life? They let their bias and intentional discrimination and harassment slip in this comment.
In the vast majority of cases, if the children lived with their father, they would continue to benefit from his income, and live well. So, why do they yank them away from dad, and then cry about financial hardship??? Wake up you nazi so-called “government” idiots. We know you are making up lies and propaganda just to extort more money from We the People. It’s never been about the children, it’s simply and plainly about justifying the thousands of jobs in “child support enforcement”, and justifying the illegal siezure of private property with no valid or legal state interest. Thieves. “I’m just doing my job”. You’ll burn in hell for just “doing your job”.
Oh, and just a suggestion, think seriously about asset protection. Now! Sell your car to someone (LLC? Parents? Uncle?), and then “lease” it from them. Not your car, can’t get stolen by the state.
Or you could add alien holder to the title of the car. Someone you trust, and they can’t take your car then either.
sam
This is another grand stand by some ill informed macho man that knows very little about divorces and how men get screwed. It’s obvious to me that these people are brainwashed by the media, by the females feminazzis and the judges and lawyers that feed off the system. Guys and females, it’s obvious that the laws need changing cause the system is broken, biased and dysfunctional.
So, what should every man do, besides bitch to our legislatures to make the changes? Here are my suggestions: do not get married, do not have kids. I f you are in a marriage get out before 10 years cause then it is lifetime alimony for you men. If you are married and unhappy stick it out, send her off to work and kiss her ass. Remember it only takes one to divorce but two to marry, and most divorces are filed by women not men. So, guys do not get sucked into a marriage on the premise that you will have eternal great sex anytime you want. It’s not like that. The sex stops after a marriage and she’ll only do it when she is in the mood either with you or somebody else. Sex after marriage only gets worse and less and less frequent. It doesn’t get better by marriage. There is nothing in a marriage that a man cannot have outside of it. So, do not do it. FXXXX and leave them when they get bitchy and abusive.
Lets Get united and let’s change the laws.
Noting that the County Executive Andrew Spano said that the newspaper photos could accomplish three objectives:
_Embarrass (extort) the four men into making payments (or risk blackmail, libel, slander . . . vigilante callousness . . ).
_Prompt people (entice people to participate in the bloodying of hands via the mob-dynamics of kicking those who are down) who recognize them to report their whereabouts.
_Put other offenders (of too frequently, the state’s reckless and unconstitutional mistreatment for mislabeling) on notice (in fear and anxiety on top of the already crumbling vulnerabilities of shame in having been driven from homes, children, communities . . . very likely under false allegations) that their pictures, too, might appear in the newspaper or on TV (probably with accompanying libels and slanders of already known reckless disregard to statutory safeguard provisions and in ready recognition of the all too well understood dynamics of the harmful effects likely against the integrity of humanity and also against the more cherishable loving parent-child relationship)
(I’m sure that these state members of self-licensed authority for such clever and crafty – but unconstitutional mind you – coffer schemes most certainly have not children of there own (or perhaps have simply forgotten the dynamics inherent therein) by which to more responsibly appreciate the depths and importance of parental love. But may they eventually become cognizant of their role and temptations thereby in the rather open and flagrant attempts toward denigration of loving parents and of the cherishable parent-child relations. And may an almighty grant mercy and graciousness for such deeds of knowledgeable commitment and/or of well known or unbeknownst effects.
Again, those addicted to Federal Dole . . . behold hearts on the Federal Dole . . . just saying no. )
————————
We also forget the more glaring accomplishments of such proud “officers,” “stewards” and “guardians” of civil governance for
– the grandest of embarrassments to “our society” collectively, and
– the furthering of needless (although not unforeseeable) self-terminations
– i.e., ultimate expungement of loving parents to needy children.
(as though history is merely repeating) Realities of non-democratic principals will certainly present with the eventual ominous magnitude of our wrongs as various communities begin the more responsible but lengthy road to more honorable self-awareness of the emerging white elephant that presently feeds in unchecked and insatiable attempt for self-gratification at ultimate expense to the even more vulnerable
hearts and pockets of our children
via (of an even more offensive offense) the irrational rationalizations as the self-appointed ventriloquist for our children.
With sincerity of appall and concern,
– just adad
I agree with Robert’s challenge to the Press — even the AP — to consider reporting on the very real and known incentives of the Feds and States into the meddling of personalm family and otherwise inviolate affairs of individual liberty . . .
And likewise with the notations of Garibaldi, that often (if not more than likely), certain compromises of a loving parent have likely been made in an absence of freewill and more than likely out of duress and feeling of need to just “move on” with dignity and to get out (of the way of the entitled more) so as to skirt very damaging conflicts inherent with “irreconcilable differences.”
Further more; often the individuals assembled for the administration of the Federally Contracted provisions of Tile IV-D pay little if any attention to their contracted “promises or commitments” therein. Instead of dealing with such realities and statutory provisions – which would include risk of potential self-admittance of wrongs – vigilant pointing of fingers begin with ever more grandiose acts for furthering the denigrations of loving parents. – i.e., spin control.
Say, maybe we can get a deadbeat on dancing with the stars. :^)
He noted that reneging on court-ordered child support “not only changes the quality of life of the spouse and children but it also dips into the pockets of the taxpayers†by forcing many families onto welfare rolls.
Am I wrong, or does child support means support for the children, not the spouse. I thourght support for the spouse was something else.
All each one of us has to do is stop working. Stop paying the so called Child Support. Yes..that may mean we will be on the streets for a while. Its not like it cant be done. Look at how many people are homeless now as it is!! They do it, so can we!!
I have not paid a damn dime of CS for over 2 years. How do I do it? I DONT WORK. I have only spent 10 days in jail because of NOT PAYING. The judge also said he could fine me $1000 bucks. I told him go ahead, I dont have a job so I wont pay.They dont really want to put ALL of us in jail. There is not enough room for them to put all of us so called deadbeat dads in jail.
I am not afraid of going back to jail again. They have already beaten me down, but I am not out. I will be a “Ghandi” in that I will passivly resist all that they say I “have” to do.
One thing that gets me is, if we do a crime we go to jail. When we serve our time for the crime commited, we get out. So..since I served 10 days in jail for not paying over $20,000 in CS, does that mean the CS is wiped out like all the other people who get out of jail after their sentence is over? HELL NO!!! We server our time and then we get “punished” for it again! I served my time, my $20,000+ should be erased. So..if they want to punish me again, it should only be for the newer amounts they say I owe.
I have a better idea. Why dont they just let each person share in the children equally as it says in the law? It says something along the lines of “Presumption of Joint Physical Custody”. So..why isnt that what is enforced? I believe if it were enforced then the women would not walk out of the marriges so readily!!! They dont want to share the children with the fater unless it is “convienent” to them. That is how my childrens mother was anyway.
SCREW’EM ALL I SAY!!
When I heard about that one Judge getting shot by some ticked off ex-husband,, I thought ‘Yeah’ !!!!
I’ve been jacked around by 4 judges, the female makes what ever (false) allegations she wants and the idiot cops/judges believe her !!
Yea,, take his car, then how does he get to work ?? -duh-.
I have no sympathy for 90% of the poor females out there !!
I haven’t seen my son for over 2 years, ‘if’ I would of kept my son from his so-called mother, what a bastard I would be, but it’s ok for her to ruin the relationship me and my son use to have.
to hell with our family courts.
T.E. Hellerud
Here’s advice to those that are having a tough time with state agencies that are freely helping their ex harass them.
Set up a complaint website using the state agency name in the domain name as well as a domain name that contains the name of your ex.
see http://www.WebGripeSites.com
Then send the url via return receipt U.S. Postal service to the offending state agency and ex notifying them that the public will be following along in any “child support” enforcement that they will be participating in.
Is this legal?
Yes! See TaubmanSucks.Com
Domains are $6.99 through DomainSite.Com
http://www.neighborhoodnet.net/faq.html#griping
http://www.SRNMSucks.com
http://www.SealRiteSucks.com
Here’s advice to those that are having a tough time with state agencies that are freely helping their ex harass them.
Set up a complaint website using the state agency name in the domain name as well as a domain name that contains the name of your ex.
see http://www.WebGripeSites.com
Then send the url via return receipt U.S. Postal service to the offending state agency and ex notifying them that the public will be following along in any “child support” enforcement that they will be participating in.
Is this legal?
Yes! See TaubmanSucks.Com
Domains are $6.99 through DomainSite.Com
http://www.SRNMSucks.com
http://www.SealRiteSucks.com
Here’s advice to those that are having a tough time with state agencies that are freely helping their ex harass them.
Set up a complaint website using the state agency name in the domain name as well as a domain name that contains the name of your ex.
see http://www.WebGripeSites.com
Then send the url via return receipt U.S. Postal service to the offending state agency and ex notifying them that the public will be following along in any “child support” enforcement that they will be participating in.
Is this legal?
Yes! See http://www.TaubmanSucks.Com
Domains are $6.99 through DomainSite.Com
http://www.SRNMSucks.com
http://www.SealRiteSucks.com
Here’s advice to those that are having a tough time with state agencies that are freely helping their ex harass them.
Set up a complaint website using the state agency name in the domain name as well as a domain name that contains the name of your ex.
see http://www.WebGripeSites.com
Then send the url via return receipt U.S. Postal service to the offending state agency and ex notifying them that the public will be following along in any “child support” enforcement that they will be participating in.
Is this legal?
Yes! See TaubmanSucks.Com
Domains are $6.99 through DomainSite.Com
http://www.SRNMSucks.com
http://www.SealRiteSucks.com
It’s not called child support any more. For quite some time now it has been called FAMILY SUPPORT.
The goal has been and will continue to be to make sure that the custodial family’s life style does not go down once a divorce happens.
Remember the research about women and poverty? It was flawed research but courts continue to use it, media still report it, the data base that was used was kept out of other reasurchers hands until the passage of the Violence Against Woment Act. Oh by the way, the woman who published the data about women and poverty after a divorce, (you know the one where the mothers lifestyle decreased by 70% and the fathers rose by 25%) said it was a math error. But that numer 70% is still being used.
I notice that this guy never mentions the hundreds of millions of dollars in extortion that are paid faithfully and the fact that no one tracks where the extortion goes and how many women are living an exorbitant live style on the exes dime. This guy is after votes and making dads the boogie man works! How many of these father fled from the abuse of their former “marriage” like I did? Who determines how much extortion is “appropriate”, not an accountant or a mathemetition I suspect? It sounds like he is punishing men who had the nerve to say NO to the court ordered extortion. This man sounds jealous. You would think that if he experienced it, he would have the nerve to stand up and fight it. The guy’s a sheep in wolves clothing, a typical politition and is there any lower form of life?.
That is really stupid. Why would you impound the Fathers car? How do they get to work to make the money to pay the child support??? Think about that… The whole point is to pay child support. Not make it harder for the Father to pay.
One of Westchester County’s largest child support offenders is a woman — she owes $68,000.
So why is this article titled “Deadbeatdads”
Newspaper Ad Highlights ‘Deadbeat Dads’
One Woman Also Made List
POSTED: 9:05 am EDT October 19, 2006
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. — Deadbeat dads: Pay your child support, or wind up in a newspaper ad.
Web Site: Deadbeat Dads
Westchester County, N.Y., bought a quarter-page ad labeled “Deadbeat Dads” in the New York Post this week. The ad reads: “Do you know where these deadbeat dads are? Their children don’t.”
“We are turning up the pressure on these deadbeats,” said County Executive Andy Spano. “We have many ways of making them pay — suspending their driver’s licenses, garnishing their pay, even arresting them — but we hope that this latest method will shame them, and others who see the ad into doing the right thing.”
The first ad in the paper features four deadbeat fathers who owe a total of $192,576 for their six children.
The county hopes the four major child support debtors are shamed into paying, or at least officials can find out where they are. It’s the county’s latest move in the crackdown on absent parents. Photos and information on them and eight other deadbeats, including a mother, can also be found on the county’s Web site.
The county said the men owe between $34,000 and $63,000 each. The ex-wife of a man who owes $63,000 said he may have fled the country but she hopes his friends will see the ad and speak to him.
One of Westchester County’s largest child support offenders is a woman — she owes $68,000.
“Making sure that parents take financial responsibility for their children is a major issue because it not only affects the lives of these children, but society as a whole,’” said Spano. “When parents don’t pay child support, families are forced to go on public assistance and the taxpayer ends up taking on that responsibility.”
Westchester County Social Services Commissioner Kevin Mahon said that the Office of Child Support Enforcement currently has 16,872 open cases. About 40 percent of these families are on public assistance, and 60 percent are not.
The 12 people featured on the Web site owe a total of $412,840, but that is only a fraction of the amount actually owed. DSS estimates that if all the back payments that were owed were ultimately collected, it would total $144 million
These criminals are trying to use fear to extract their extortion, the same as it has been done throughout history.
The following is some interesting reading. Not that these criminals are interested in the law, they are breaking the law routinely, and are in fact a treasonous “domestic enemyâ€. I think it’s important for us to realize that we “are not†breaking any laws by refusing to cooperate with these criminals. We “are†breaking the law and are guilty of treason if we give aid and comfort to this domestic enemy by our continued cooperation.
Kevin Merck
Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.
Thomas Jefferson
Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition
FRAUD, contracts, torts. Any trick or artifice employed by one person to
induce another to fall into an error, or to detain him in it, so that he may
make an agreement contrary to his interest. The fraud may consist either,
first, in the misrepresentation, or, secondly, in the concealment of a
material fact. Fraud, force and vexation, are odious in law. Booth, Real
Actions, 250. Fraud gives no action, however, without damage; 3 T. R. 56;
and in matters of contract it is merely a defence; it cannot in any case
constitute a new contract. 7 Vez. 211; 2 Miles’ Rep. 229. It is essentially
ad hominem. 4 T. R. 337-8.
2. Fraud avoids a contract, ab initio, both at law and in equity, whether
the object be to deceive the public, or third persons, or one party endeavor
thereby to cheat the other. 1 Fonb. Tr. Equity, 3d ed. 66, note; 6th ed.
122, and notes; Newl. Cont. 352; 1 Bl. R. 465; Dougl. Rep. 450; 3 Burr. Rep.
1909; 3 V. & B. Rep. 42; 3 Chit. Com. Law, 155, 806, 698; 1 Sch. & Lef. 209;
Verpl. Contracts, passim; Domat, Lois Civ. p. 1, 1. 4, t. 6, s. 8, n.
Right to contract:
Note that I keep referring to Void Judgment. It’s a powerful tool. It is any
judgment that was made where the court lacked jurisdiction OR was induced by
fraud OR it violated due process. It is not necessary to prove all three
components – any one of the three creates a Void Judgment.
A void judgment which includes judgment entered by a court which lacks
jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacks inherent power
to enter the particular judgment, or an order procured by fraud, can be
attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally,
provided that the party is properly before the court. See Long v. Shore bank
Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 Ill. 1999)
Void judgment is one where court lacked personal or subject matter
jurisdiction or entry of order violated due process, U.S.C.A. Const. Amend.
5-Triad Energy Corp. v. McNell, 110 F.R.D. 382 (S.D.N.Y. 1986).
A Void Judgment may be “attacked in any court at any time”, and thus may be
used to overcome “timely response” and/or “timely filing. Thus it has no
statute of limitations, and may be asserted at the local level … on up.
=============================================
Right To Contract and Not Contract / Unconscionable Contract/ Void Judgment
15) Federal Constitutional law, Article 1 Section 10, is clear in stating
that the Petitioner has the “right to contract”, which includes the right to
“not contract.” Here, the State seems to claim that it can both “create a
contract” and also bind the Petitioner to it, without the permission or
conscionable agreement of the Petitioner. The State openly impairs the
Petitioner’s right to contract.
16) The State is mandating multiple unconscionable contracts and violates
multiple contractual obligations secured under “Obligations of Contracts”
under Article I, Section 10, of the U.S. Constitution. For example: the
right of a fit parent to contract with and for his child, Child Support – a
concept foreign to the Common Law – is a ‘Special Obligation’ that is void
of any quid pro quo or reciprocal arrangement, the State’s agenda now
provides incentives to women to unilaterally receive tax-free income in
excess of the amounts needed for the support of the necessities of the
child. This socialist “Best Interest” doctrine violates freedom to contract
by predetermining that an innocent person will suffer punishment, contrary
to the rule of Common Law. The State impairs the obligation of this right
to contract by inserting itself into the proceedings by claiming superior
title to the children and provides remedy to one gender only. The State
asserts that the innocent person suffers such punishment, absent of some
finding of “fault”, whereas, in context, it is most normally the party with
the “unclean hands”, the mother, who filed for the divorce, commonly
kidnapping the children, often filing false abuse charges or promoting
parental alienation.
17) The claim is fraudulent in Common Law and fully in violation of
Petitioner’s Natural Constitutional Rights. The State creates a completely
“unconscionable contract”, which no person in their right mind would enter,
and which is totally void of “quid pro quo” redemption. This fully violates
all mandates of Common Law. Any judgment founded or “induced by fraud” is
the subject thereof to Void Judgment.
(34) Hale v. Henkel 201 US 43 at 89 (1906. (35) [Rights and Remedies Under
U.C.C. Article 2, by Harold Greenberg, ©1987, Wiley Law Publications, John
Wiley & Sons, New York [ pp. 282-283])
Void Subject Matter Jurisdiction
5) While the statutes of the State may clearly “assign†matters of family
and children to the “civil†trial court, such an “assignment†does neither
confer nor confirm an actual subject matter jurisdiction over any given
matter, especially where it regards the ownership and custody of a parent’s
children.
6) The State, under the guise of “property†and “equity†division in a
divorce, “assigns†itself authority of the children. In fact, the State is
performing an “In Parens Patriae†action, which is profoundly protected, as
is well substantiated by Federal Stare Decisis.
7) The burden is on the State, not the citizen, to prove its case. The
Petitioner does not question the authority of the state in “its interest to
protect its childrenâ€, but argues that it’s Procedural and Substantive Fraud
in obtaining its proper authority is profoundly unconstitutional.
our Constitutional form of government and must stand the “strict scrutinyâ€
test. Regardless of State statute, which may suggest contrary actions,
those rights are profoundly protected, and any State statute, which
“by-passes†those rights, fails in its Constitutional Mandate – substantive
and procedural due process. Ergo any and all such State statutes are
profoundly unconstitutional on their face.
9) Claims of “the children’s best interest†are noticeably protected by
stare decisis, fall under the equal “strict scrutiny,†and are limited to of
“a showing of endangerment of the child.†Further, claims of “public
interestâ€, also noticeably protected by stare decisis, are not sufficient to
overcome Petitioner’s Personal Natural Rights.
10) The Petitioner further asserts that the State’s Income Based child
support statutes impermissibly infringe the Privacy Interest right under the
14th Amendment of the Federal Constitution. They, in fact, remove all rights
of fatherhood for independent self-determination, which are required
fundamentals in all free governments. The Petitioner asserts that how much
money a parent spends for the care and maintenance of his or her child is a
parenting decision and thus is a Constitutionally guaranteed natural,
fundamental right. The State government under Common and Natural Law is not
permitted to intrude upon this fundamental right without proof of
demonstrable harm to the child.
11) Ironically, the State “presumes†this authority to award custody of the
children to the mother under the guise that the mother is “the better
parent†(absent any proper hearing to so determine), but then turns around
and admits the mother is incapable of caring for the children without the
fiscal transfer of wealth from the father. Not only does the State take the
Petitioner’s property (his income) without any proper demonstration of due
process, but then openly enjoins the mother to pursue fraud for their own
fiscal gain.
12) Corrective or punitive child support can only be ordered by the
State/Court by showing a profound positive disqualification or some
wrong-doing, which “shocks the conscience†of the community, and invokes the
doctrine of parens patriae. Parens patriae may only be asserted
“reluctantlyâ€, as a “last resort†and to “save the child.†No such manifest
threshold requirement has been met by the State, whereas, it is factual,
that they have no jurisdiction to make any claim whatsoever. By mandating
child support based on combined parental income, the State exceeds the
constitutionally permitted right of the State to intrude in the Federal
Right to Privacy of a parent in the Privacy Protected Zone of Parenting. The
State has cogently, and knowingly, with premeditation, removed all rights to
individual self-determination in this matter, which is a god-given,
fundamental right as a Father.
The State mandates that a divorced parent must be forced to spend an
egregious percentage of their income on his or her children; but the State
does not, and cannot, mandate that a married parent, living in a “single
family unitâ€, spend a percentage of his income for his child. It is a fact
that under law, the father is only liable for the necessities of the child,
and no more. This difference between married and unmarried fathers violates
equal Protection and hence Due Process. More importantly, the challenged
statutes are enforced against the parent without the State ever determining
if any harm has befallen the children related to the parent’s spending for
them. As such, the State child support statutes based on combined parental
income are in fact, ultra vires and unconstitutional. The State lacks the
constitutional authority to mandate spending for a child based on income,
rather than adhering to the law which requires a child be supported only for
the necessaries.
The State asserts that the Petitioner “must pay†a sum of money to support
his children, gives the money to the mother, but makes no equal assumption
or requirement of the mother to either spend that confiscated money on the
children, or to pay an equivalent sum herself on those children. Equal
treatment under the law is wholly absent.
13) These “presumptions†are openly incompetent logic, and to which no man
in his “legally sane mind†would agree. If the mother “can’t handle itâ€
then the court should, “in the children’s best interestâ€, award custody to
the father who will. The alleged “contract of debt†against the Petitioner
is an Unconscionable Contract and a Fraud. It is an open admission that
their true “compelling interest†is founded in the state and federal
funding.
14) In as much as Petitioner’s ownership of his own children has never
lawfully been removed, no claims, orders or acts predicated from that are
lawful. The court has failed to establish its proper “compelling interestâ€
jurisdiction, acts through fraud, and thereof any “order†or “judgment†is
lawfully therefore a Void Judgment.
(21) Harris v. McRae, 448 US 297 (1980) (USSC+). (24) Santosky v Kramer,
102 S. Ct. 1388, 488 US 745, (1982). (25) Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 652
at 653 (1972). (26) Quillon v. Walcott, 434U.S. 246, 247-248 (1978) (27)
Herrick v. Richardson, 40 NH 272 (1860]. (28) People ex rel Barry v.
Mercien 3 Hill 399. (29) 30 (Fiore, 1982, pp. 141-42, citations omitted.)
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 US 745 (1982). (30) Stanley v. Illinois (1972),
405 U.S. 645 @ 657. (31) Hooks v. Hooks, 771 F.2d 935 (6th Cir.1985) @ 935;
Finding of Constitutional Law #1. (32) Watson v. City of Memphis, 83
S.Ct. 1134, 375 YS 526, 10 L.Ed.2d (1963). (33) Rideout v. Riendeau. Roth
v. Weston 789 A.2d 431, 443-444 Conn. (2002
Title 18 uscs 1001 & 1002:
These federal laws will jail any officer of the court including the judge for any trick or fraud or fraud of the fraud for up to 10 years plus a fine despite the immunity. Federal courts love to sue district courts. I repersent myself under a Title 4 uscs part 1 & 2 FLAG This flag is the only flag that protects the constitution of the USA. The gold frenge flag that flies in district court suspends the constitution. That is why you are only allowed to plead Guilty, Not Guilty, No contest and or say nothing at all. You probably will not be able to find a lawyer who repersent you under a Title 4 1X1.9 flag because they are member of the bar and the US sold the bar to England to pay for a debt in 1933. Therefore the lawyer is at the mercy of the court if he wants to practice in that court. Now you know how Great Britton is trying to distroy the american citizens. Resurch Red Brick ” Public Stock Owned” London Exchange. No of englanders and britts coming to the united states, percent of america owned by GB investors. They think they own our state legislatures and congressmen. They promote laws in the US that causes greed between famlies and legislature. They want you broke and make money from it. Geroge Bush signed the bankrupt bill and accepted the Honor for White Knight from Margrate Thacher, The Queen of England. Go Fig.
Gentlemen,
The system in the US does not favor fathers thats all to clear.
Best things to do:
Move to the states that are more understanding of the divorced father plight.
Get your business, company or industry to move there.
Become political and proactive in your state and local government.
Organize a million divorved man march, take it all the way to Washington .
Love your children and do the best that you can, till we can get the system to change and become more fair.
As a last resort, move out of the country to any place where the economic conditions favor you. Take your education and business with you.
Good Luck to All
johnqpublic
Unconstitutional Deal Bent Bats,
Bopping daddies on the head,
Should the fathers near be found,
Crack it harder till their dead.
- just adad
Behold, the Federal Dole,
Bleeding Hearts,
Picking Pockets,
Of our Children,
In the Name of Children.
– just adad
BTW, the above recites just as effectively by replacing words “daddies” and “fathers” with “Parents” and/or “Families.”
cpeyton said,
{“One thing that gets me is, if we do a crime we go to jail. When we serve our time for the crime commited, we get out. So..since I served 10 days in jail for not paying over $20,000 in CS, does that mean the CS is wiped out like all the other people who get out of jail after their sentence is over? HELL NO!!! We server our time and then we get “punished†for it again! I served my time, my $20,000+ should be erased. So..if they want to punish me again, it should only be for the newer amounts they say I owe.”}
Cpeyton:
That’s just it eh. None of us has committed any crime and the courts know full well that’s the case. These criminals are trying to enslave us, which is as old as the world’s oldest two professions, prostitution and its close second, the “legal professionâ€. The only people breaking any laws are the criminals running our courts. When people are trying to enslave you, there is no reprieve, just unrelenting persecution.
Hang in there buddy. I choose to work and still manage to avoid paying the extortion to a large extent. That course may not be for everyone, but it’s the choice I’ve made. I have refused to pay since day one, (January 1995) but have endured some garnishment over the years in order to keep my head above water. Last I heard, they claim I’m something in the neighborhood of $100,000 in arrears, just on child support, not counting health and welfare costs. That means I’ve cost the system at least an additional $60,000 or more in lost matching federal dollars, and God only knows what they claim they’ve spent trying to track me down and defend themselves in the court actions taken.
I take comfort in the fact that eventually things will change, and hopefully we will see the criminals responsible, made accountable to their victims.
You’re a good man Mr. Peyton, too bad there aren’t a lot more like you. Take Care.
Kevin Merck
Mesothelioma cancers are the cancers that unfold within the mesothelium tissues. Mesothelium usually is the title of tissue that types lining of different physique organs similar to heart, lungs, stomach and reproductive organs. The lining around belly organs is called peritoneal membrane. Lining round lungs known as pleural membrane while the lining round coronary heart is called pericardium.
I have to say that for the past couple of hours i have been hooked by the impressive posts on this site. Keep up the great work.